Live data from Hacker News

US lawmakers tell Apple, Google to be ready to remove TikTok from stores Jan. 19

reuters.com

591–600 of 769 posts

Re: US lawmakers tell Apple, Google to be ready to remove TikTok from stores Jan. 19

#591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it's the lack of black and whiteness that makes me so confused as to why you would brand the government of a 1 billion person nation as an enemy rather than say, a competitor or even an ally that behaves in occasionally intolerable ways. Kind of like how a lot of nations continue to be allies with a nation that goes around invading other nations and deposing legitimately elected governments in the interest of or…

Name one single other country that we trade with that has an official policy that it owns another country we trade with, and insists that if we say out loud the other country is a country it means immediate war?

> has an official policy that it owns another country we trade with, and insists that if we say out loud the other country is a country it means immediate war?

there is a cost for maintaining the US hegemony, Taiwan is being used as an excuse to maximize such cost for the US - China gets to choose when and how to increase tensions, the US has to react accordingly and spend more and more borrowed resources as responses. that is the official policy, a smart one.

Re: US lawmakers tell Apple, Google to be ready to remove TikTok from stores Jan. 19

#592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Censorship... zzzZZZzz They're banning app/news delivery app managed by enemy government It is not like they're blocking internet, wikipedia they're banning stupid, memes/brainrot app

You put zzzzzzzz like this is a nothing burger but the United States has never legally prohibited citizens from viewing news, books and information from foreign countries. It's actually new.

> legally prohibited citizens from viewing news, books and information from foreign countries.

Sorry can you point out where they are doing this? because banning tiktok certainly is not doing those things.

Re: US lawmakers tell Apple, Google to be ready to remove TikTok from stores Jan. 19

#593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Deliberately misinforming people, especially under a foreign state payroll, is illegal. First of all if you have any evidence of TikTok engaging in it, you should present it since even our government have said there is no such evidence and that possibility remains hypothetical. Secondly no, it's not illegal to spread misinformation, no matter the motive. The First Amendment absolutely guarantees that right.

[flagged]

Facebook, instagram and youtube have been used to manipulate elections way before tiktok, that’s not the reason it’s being banned.

Re: US lawmakers tell Apple, Google to be ready to remove TikTok from stores Jan. 19

#594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Americans can’t invest directly in Chinese companies This is not true. You can trade onshore Mainland China stocks through the Hongkong Stock Exchange. There is a special programmed called "Northbound" and "Southbound" in the broker-dealer industry. (This also allows investors from Mainland China to trades Hongkong stocks.) Any big brokerage should offer access to the Hongkong Stock Exchange. There is even a weird…

That’s a good clarification as not all companies are tech related and there are companies eligible for trading. However northbound trading still follows all applicable laws and there’s no access to direct ownership in some amazing companies

    > there’s no access to direct ownership in some amazing companies
Can you provide some examples?

Re: US lawmakers tell Apple, Google to be ready to remove TikTok from stores Jan. 19

#595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware of what happened in Romania with Tiktok? A candidate got funded by foreign agents, paid for influencers, and sprinkled with Russian bot accounts it was enough to make a pro-Russian candidate get 20% of votes when he was an unknown political figure.[0] The app allows this. You can try to distract everyone from an app that enables illegal foreign interference by hiding under the guise of "oh, this is just…

And that's why X/Twitter should be banned too... ;-) And Facebook too !! :-D (obviously kidding but... well... not so much after seing https://www.france.tv/documentaires/documentaires-societe/67... )

Not so much, which is precisely why China does ban Twitter and Facebook. I’d love to have a detente where every country has a permissive policy towards social media apps and accepts some degree of soft power from it, but that’s not where we’re at.

Re: US lawmakers tell Apple, Google to be ready to remove TikTok from stores Jan. 19

#596
post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Deliberately misinforming people, especially under a foreign state payroll, is illegal. First of all if you have any evidence of TikTok engaging in it, you should present it since even our government have said there is no such evidence and that possibility remains hypothetical. Secondly no, it's not illegal to spread misinformation, no matter the motive. The First Amendment absolutely guarantees that right.

> Secondly no, it's not illegal to spread misinformation, no matter the motive. The First Amendment absolutely guarantees that right. Again, does NOBODY know what the first amendment covers??? If you yell FIRE in a crowded theatre (misinformation) that is not covered by the 1st amendment[1]. Please stop talking confidently about something you don't understand. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_State…

Why did you cite a case that was overturned by https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

The new ruling makes it clear that misinformation is legal under 1A

Re: US lawmakers tell Apple, Google to be ready to remove TikTok from stores Jan. 19

#597
post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you believe that META does not censor content? To some degree for sure, simply because they have to by law. > Or amplify specific views? Or suppress the reach of certain others? They have the technical capabilities and what Meta in particular does: I don't know. But given the social media landscape as a whole (not only platsforms by Meta) and seeing so many nutjobs having tremendous reach with lies and fake cont…

Some valid points. But seeing how traditional media has been framing certain events, avoiding to name certain agressors, while being very clear with others, it is obvious that our Western media has a strong bias towards certain narratives. You might say "isn't that normal / desired?". No, I would like to have objective reports, no matter who is doing what.

I agree, western media seems more (self-?)controlled than social media. But this post is specifically about social media.

Re: US lawmakers tell Apple, Google to be ready to remove TikTok from stores Jan. 19

#598

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even very intelligent people will accept this argument for America, and then reject it for often literally every other country. Imagine I made the same argument for Russia, or China, or North Korea, or Syria, or Venezuela, or some other country the Western mainstream media says is bad. You'd presumably come up with a reason - immediately, effortlessly, almost without thinking - why it didn't apply in that case, and t…

As someone that had to deal with one of the countries in your list - they’re bad.

At no stage in my argument did I make any point contrary to that, and my argument is in no way about that.

The point is simply that U.S. democracy is visibly in tatters. Clinging on to this notion that still, in spite of all the evidence in front of our eyes, the U.S. is somehow fundamentally and essentially different to the other historical empires, is just your usual bog-standard nationalist delusion.

I think that the founding story of the States is beautiful, and that some of the early writing is really quite something (I'm thinking of Paine in particular here). And I'm very fond of some of the other cultural output. It's not "pleasant" to face the reality of the modern day U.S.A., is what I'm saying, but to hope to improve the state of the world, it has to be done.

There are many statistical datapoints which suggest the country is doing very poorly socially. Then it seems to me that a serious case can be made that the vast network of state, semi-private and private institutions over there involved in the "security" sector (arms, cyber, related fields) has gotten completely out of hand and answers effectively to itself only.

I'm trying to refrain from making specific examples here, because any mention of a specific issue will result in the assumption that some partisan point is being made. Accepting that risk, perhaps we could: look at the president; look at what the alternatives were; look at the previous presidents from the last decades; look at the legal system; look at the prison system; look at povery rates; look at crime rates; look at political prisoners; look at the increase in attacks on the media; look at military spending; look at straightforward, old-fashioned corruption; look at drone strikes; look at studies of how the state's actions tracks with polls of what the populace want; etc etc.

At a certain point, it's hard to believe in the intellectual integrity of observers who cling on to the argument: "ah, but look, that other country is worse!" This is an obvious race to the bottom, and can excuse any level of depravity. Again, it's hard to see how this belief is possible to hold without a solid dose of quasi-religious nationalist fervour.

Re: US lawmakers tell Apple, Google to be ready to remove TikTok from stores Jan. 19

#599
post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot. But in US you have elections every 4 years wheres in Russia or China both Putin and Xi are "elected" for their lifetime. Does it tell you anything ?

And both parties are almost exactly the same with foreign policy. The "two-party system" in the U.S. is perhaps broken beyond repair, and presents an illusion of choice in many ways rather than an actual choice.

I was referring to "how could you be sure that American made LLMs are not altered in a way to maximize US interests at the costs of everyone else's."

But your answer intelligently redirecs focus to different topic. Is it on purpose ?

Re: US lawmakers tell Apple, Google to be ready to remove TikTok from stores Jan. 19

#600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Secondly no, it's not illegal to spread misinformation, no matter the motive. The First Amendment absolutely guarantees that right. Not accurate, no, assuming that by misinformation you mean information that the author knows to be false. To name just two quite legally clear examples with no inherent connection to foreign states, US defamation law and US product liability law often create civil liability and occasio…

>even though more targeted bans have been upheld as passing the relevant judicial tests for laws affecting First Amendment rights. Such as?

Such as the two examples I gave in the comment you're quoting: US defamation law and US product liability law.

To be more concrete about the defamation example:

Imagine someone has a grudge against you for some reason that doesn't involve any history of illegal behavior, like maybe your business won a lucrative contract that they wanted for their business. Motivated by a desire to hurt your personal reputation and cause you social ostracism, they tell all your friends and neighbors that you're a convicted murderer, when they know you've never even been accused of any kind of wrongdoing in any court whatsoever.

To the best of my knowledge, this is illegal defamation in every US state, and it's criminal in some of them. Although it's rarely prosecuted as a crime, criminal defamation laws have been upheld as constitutional in certain situations including ones that would cover this scenario (if the available evidence meets the criminal standard of proof in court). Civil defamation lawsuits are commonly enough made across the US, and under scenarios like this one, are also commonly enough won (or settled between the parties).

To be more concrete about the product liability example:

Imagine that you are a business selling a product and you write "safe for all ages" on the box, when you know it has components that are small enough for young children to choke on, but you lie about it on the packaging because your product really appeals to young children and you don't want to lose out on the profits from selling to their parents. If a 2-year-old then proceeds to choke on one of the components in the box, yes indeed there are lots of courts across the US that would award damages to the affected family, and maybe some courts that would find criminal liability as well although I'm less sure of that question.

Post reply on HN